CDJ Eliminated??

I really don't understand what banning spurs would prove?
Banning the misuse of spurs (and other kit) is a good thing and covered by existing rules.
The blood rule is a good thing but a rider does not have to have misused their equipment to be caught by it.

Banning spurs would just reduce riders to dulled leg aids, rather than the ability to give a brief precise instruction.
If a horse was that sensitive skinned, or so dulled to the leg that light aids weren't effective, the potential is that either it would still be rubbed by the leg, or that the rider would be using more forceful leg aids to achieve the same thing.

can someone who would want to ban them explain exactly what it would do to improve horse welfare?
I would support a change of rules to stop them being mandatory at these levels but that's a different thing.
 
A very professional statement from Charlotte. She adores her horses and I imagine will be quite devastated about this.
Thin skinned and recently clipped horses can be extremely sensitive even to the leather of a riders boots. I see a lot of showjumpers leave a hairy patch where the spur sits.
 
milliepops said:
I really don't understand what banning spurs would prove?
Banning the misuse of spurs (and other kit) is a good thing and covered by existing rules.
The blood rule is a good thing but a rider does not have to have misused their equipment to be caught by it.

Banning spurs would just reduce riders to dulled leg aids, rather than the ability to give a brief precise instruction.
If a horse was that sensitive skinned, or so dulled to the leg that light aids weren't effective, the potential is that either it would still be rubbed by the leg, or that the rider would be using more forceful leg aids to achieve the same thing.

can someone who would want to ban them explain exactly what it would do to improve horse welfare?
I would support a change of rules to stop them being mandatory at these levels but that's a different thing.
Click to expand...
t

i would genuinely like to see if it would improve riding ability from ground level and radically
change teaching methods

not causing more forceful leg aids, but creating horses more sensitive to leg aids

isobel werth is the last person i would wish to comment on!

i must say i think the greatest gift a trainer can have is humility, there is no superiority in being in awe of horses.
 
tristar said:
t

i would genuinely like to see if it would improve riding ability from ground level and radically
change teaching methods

not causing more forceful leg aids, but creating horses more sensitive to leg aids
Click to expand...

I'm literally a bit speechless at this part
Actually what part of Carl's training of Charlotte do you think has gone wrong?
 
I think the whole thing has been blown out if proportion. There wasn't blood pouring from the horse, there wasn't a gaping open wound, there was a rub, enough of one to be eliminated.

As for the guy who was eliminated for the horse biting it's tongue - thats sheer bad luck. He knows when the horse did it - when it wad being a bit of a fud.

I find the rules very strict but that's a good thing. If there is no real margin for error then people can't be felt hard done by.
 
milliepops said:
I'm literally a bit speechless at this part
Actually what part of Carl's training of Charlotte do you think has gone wrong?
Click to expand...

well just have a cup of tea and sit down.


i just do not like spurs

i have not commented on carl or charlotte only spurs in general
 
I have trained my horses to Grand Prix, and I can easily ride them without spurs at that level, as I'm sure most GP riders can. What people fail to grasp when they want to ban spurs etc, is the precision element of them, when a horse is trained to this level there are a lot of movements it has learnt, and obviously a greater degree of subtlety in the riders aids. So its easy to ride without spurs in terms of forwardness and responsiveness, but not so easy in terms of refined communication.
 
I'm pretty sure carl and Charlotte's horses are much more off the leg than most!
I too suspect they are clipped but also possibly in a soft changing coat already (mine was always better clipped as less hair to pull apparently).
EKW I agree I like the rules for their clarity, there is no judgement involved. People saying well they are in arena people can see there has been no abuse of the horse (on fb) have rather missed the point I think.
 
ester said:
I'm pretty sure carl and Charlotte's horses are much more off the leg than most!
I too suspect they are clipped but also possibly in a soft changing coat already (mine was always better clipped as less hair to pull apparently).
EKW I agree I like the rules for their clarity, there is no judgement involved. People saying well they are in arena people can see there has been no abuse of the horse (on fb) have rather missed the point I think.
Click to expand...
It's not really a rule that would work if there were degrees of blood that were acceptable, I agree. It has to be totally black and white.
 
tristar said:
t
not causing more forceful leg aids, but creating horses more sensitive to leg aids

.
Click to expand...
This single sentence proves that you have absolutely no idea whatsoever about the correct use of spurs and as such it’s a damn good thing that you don’t use them.

Spurs are not used for more forceful aids, they are used for more refined aids, on a GP dressage horse there are so many buttons trained into a very small area that the precision of a spur is needed!

As I said on the other thread, spurs are akin to saying “3rd road on the left” when giving directions rather than saying “somewhere over there ish”
 
Levrier said:
What’s that got to do with it? I’m not the one posting waffle on a forum....

For the record, he is one of the best horsemen of his generation
Click to expand...


you bought the subject of carl up, and how nice of you to call anther persons ideas waffle, if i think the use of spurs is not a good thing i am entitled to that opinion.

also i think everyone is aware of carl`s riding ability, why do you feel the need to say it in such a defensive way?
 
conniegirl said:
This single sentence proves that you have absolutely no idea whatsoever about the correct use of spurs and as such it’s a damn good thing that you don’t use them.

Spurs are not used for more forceful aids, they are used for more refined aids, on a GP dressage horse there are so many buttons trained into a very small area that the precision of a spur is needed!

As I said on the other thread, spurs are akin to saying “3rd road on the left” when giving directions rather than saying “somewhere over there ish”
Click to expand...


of course you are right, i have no idea about using spurs the main reason being i have never used them in my life, so i could not argue with that.

its a damn good thing i don`t use them, mainly because having resisted the temptation i found ways to train my horse to respond to very light aids, this took a long time but it was the best thing i ever did, i learned so much.

forceful aids was referring to mp`s comment that `banning spurs would reduce riders to dulled leg aids`

you say with a gp horse `the precision of a spur is needed` daffy44 says they ride their horse with or without.

i should imagine lots of people would love to post on h h forum but would be too afraid of the reaction!
 
ester said:
and we know how difficult it is to define whether a horse is being abused in the arena/on XC etc that's someone's judgement at the day. blood is there or not there.
Click to expand...

exactly, where does that leave charlotte, what does she feel inside herself?
 
daffy44 said:
I have trained my horses to Grand Prix, and I can easily ride them without spurs at that level, as I'm sure most GP riders can. What people fail to grasp when they want to ban spurs etc, is the precision element of them, when a horse is trained to this level there are a lot of movements it has learnt, and obviously a greater degree of subtlety in the riders aids. So its easy to ride without spurs in terms of forwardness and responsiveness, but not so easy in terms of refined communication.
Click to expand...

I'm not going to put words in d's mouth, but here's the rest of the post, in case you missed it ;)
 
tristar said:
of course you are right, i have no idea about using spurs the main reason being i have never used them in my life, so i could not argue with that.

its a damn good thing i don`t use them, mainly because having resisted the temptation i found ways to train my horse to respond to very light aids, this took a long time but it was the best thing i ever did, i learned so much.

forceful aids was referring to mp`s comment that `banning spurs would reduce riders to dulled leg aids`

you say with a gp horse `the precision of a spur is needed` daffy44 says they ride their horse with or without.
Click to expand...
Your opinion is clearly based on sanctimonious ignorance, misinformation and a holier than thou attitude. Have you even ridden a dressage test above elementary level?

all my horses/ponies respond to very light leg aids with or without spurs, 90% of my schooling is done without spurs, I only reach for them when schooling has reached such a level that precision is needed. basic forward is achieved way before precision is needed (like years before)

you've taken Daffys comment out of context she says she can ride at that level but that it is more precise with spurs, and therefore easier for the horse to understand.

using spurs for forward is what I would expect of a novice rider, using spurs for their true purpose (refinement) takes training and a very very good seat/leg.

I've not used spurs since I has my ankle reconstructed, mainly because that leg is now weak and I do not feel that it is stable enough to use spurs correctly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top